Read the following passage and answer the questions based on the passage :
Language has rarely been a neutral vehicle of communication; in colonial India, it functioned as an instrument of control, ideology, and identity. The British administration, while ostensibly engaged in civilizing and educating the colonized, meticulously manipulated linguistic hierarchies to entrench authority. English, elevated to the status of official and judicial language, was not merely a tool of governance—it became a symbol of intellectual legitimacy and social mobility. Indigenous languages, by contrast, were systematically subordinated, fragmented, and recast as vernaculars—a term that subtly suggested parochialism and inferiority. The imposition of English education through Macaulay’s Minute of 1835 was more than a curricular reform; it was a calculated cultural intervention. The production of a class of Indians who were, in Macaulay’s words, “Indian in blood and color, but English in taste,” exemplified a form of linguistic hegemony designed to internalize colonial values. English became the medium through which the colonized were taught to perceive themselves and their traditions through the lens of imperial rationality, often resulting in alienation from indigenous epistemologies. Simultaneously, the colonial state’s treatment of regional languages was riddled with contradictions. While British administrators encouraged the codification of Indian languages, such efforts often stripped them of their oral fluidity and cultural nuance. Sanskrit and Persian, once associated with prestige, were gradually marginalized, while languages like Hindi and Urdu became arenas of communal and political contestation—each championed by different religious and regional groups, further entrenching societal divisions. This reshaping of linguistic order served dual purposes: facilitating administrative efficiency and diffusing dissent. A populace divided along linguistic and communal lines was easier to govern. Moreover, fluency in English became a gatekeeping mechanism for bureaucratic inclusion and economic opportunity, thereby embedding inequality into the fabric of colonial modernity. In essence, language under colonial rule was not just about grammar or vocabulary—it was about access, allegiance, and authority. Understanding this interplay offers a lens into how colonial power was sustained not only through coercion but also through cultural engineering. In post-colonial India, the legacies of this linguistic stratification continue to reverberate in educational policy, social mobility, and debates over language and identity.
What was the primary role of English in colonial India according to the passage?
- (a)Enhancing regional unity
- (b)Facilitating oral traditions
- (c)Legitimizing colonial ideology and control
- (d)Promoting Indian languages
Answer
Why
Correct — C. The passage says English "was not merely a tool of governance—it became a symbol of intellectual legitimacy and social mobility."
Producing an English-educated class "exemplified a form of linguistic hegemony designed to internalize colonial values".
And fluency in English became "a gatekeeping mechanism for bureaucratic inclusion".
Legitimacy, colonial values and gatekeeping add up to legitimizing colonial ideology and control → option (c).
Why the others are wrong
- (a)Enhancing regional unity — Regional unity is the reverse of the passage, which says the reshaping of languages entrenched "societal divisions" and that "A populace divided along linguistic and communal lines was easier to govern."
- (b)Facilitating oral traditions — Oral comes up once in the passage, as a loss: codification of Indian languages "stripped them of their oral fluidity". That is said of Indian languages, not of English.
- (d)Promoting Indian languages — Promoting Indian languages reverses the passage. Indigenous languages were "systematically subordinated, fragmented, and recast as vernaculars" while English was elevated.
Concept
A primary role question asks for the idea the passage keeps building, not a detail lifted from one sentence.
The author opens by calling language in colonial India "an instrument of control, ideology, and identity", then applies that to English: official status, legitimacy, colonial values, gatekeeping.
The keyed option is a summary of those threads. The distractors either reverse the passage or borrow a word from what it says about Indian languages.
No single sentence states option (c) word for word. It joins what separate sentences say about English, which is why it reads as a paraphrase rather than a quotation.
Key facts
- The passage dates Macaulay's Minute to 1835.
- In the passage, English is raised to official and judicial language while indigenous languages are recast as vernaculars.
- The passage names two purposes of the linguistic reshaping: administrative efficiency and diffusing dissent.
Study next
Common traps
- Choosing facilitating oral traditions because oral appears in the passage, without checking what it is said about
- Picking promoting Indian languages from the mention of codification, which the passage says stripped those languages of nuance
The same passage is asked about at 17 Sep 2025, 16:00, English Q.18, where Macaulay's Minute is keyed as having institutionalized English as a tool of cultural dominance.
Related PYQs
No directly related past PYQ was found.